REVERSING UNDERACHIEVEMENT - CREATIVE PRODUCTIVITY AS A SYSTEMATIC INTERVENTION

Citation
Sm. Baum et al., REVERSING UNDERACHIEVEMENT - CREATIVE PRODUCTIVITY AS A SYSTEMATIC INTERVENTION, The Gifted child quarterly, 39(4), 1995, pp. 224-235
Citations number
37
Categorie Soggetti
Education, Special
Journal title
ISSN journal
00169862
Volume
39
Issue
4
Year of publication
1995
Pages
224 - 235
Database
ISI
SICI code
0016-9862(1995)39:4<224:RU-CPA>2.0.ZU;2-V
Abstract
This study combined qualitative and quantitative methodology in a mult iple case study to examine the phenomenon of underachievement and the effect of using creative productivity (Type III) enrichment as a syste matic intervention in reversing the pattern. Twelve teachers who recei ved training in the Enrichment Triad Model selected 17 students identi fied as gifted who were also underachieving in their school performanc e. The 17 students, ages 8-13, included five girls and twelve boys. Al l students were guided through a Type III study by their referring tea cher during one school year. Questionnaires, interest surveys, intervi ews, product evaluation, and participant observations provided informa tion about individual students in the context of pursuing Type III inv estigations. The findings regarding the use of creative productivity t o address underachievement were numerous. First, a variety of factors contributed to the underachievement of students with high academic pot ential including: emotional issues (dysfunctional families); social an d behavioral issues (the influence of an inappropriate peer group); th e lack of an appropriate curriculum (students not motivated by the reg ular curriculum); and a suspected learning disability or poor self-reg ulation. The most compelling finding of this research study was the po sitive gains made by the students through their involvement in the Typ e III intervention. Eighty-two percent of the students made positive g ains during the course of the year and in the year following the inter vention. Most were no longer underachieving in their school settings a t the end of the intervention. Five aspects of the process evolved as important foci for different groups of students: 1) the relationship w ith the teacher; 2) presentation of self-regulation strategies, 3) opp ortunity to investigate their own issue of underachievement, 4) the op portunity to work on an area of interest in their preferred learning s tyle and 5) the opportunity to interact with an appropriate peer group .